<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: CIC needs to Change</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.socialcatalyst.co.uk/2009/07/30/cic-needs-to-change/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.socialcatalyst.co.uk/2009/07/30/cic-needs-to-change/</link>
	<description>Social Entrepreneurs who make places and spaces work.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 26 Oct 2011 08:16:47 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Mike Chitty</title>
		<link>http://www.socialcatalyst.co.uk/2009/07/30/cic-needs-to-change/comment-page-1/#comment-3</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike Chitty</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Jul 2009 07:45:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://193.189.74.98/%7Esocialca/?p=5#comment-3</guid>
		<description>Whoa steady Tiger!
Firstly why should just CICs from the pantheon of SE legal structures provide a reward to  the entrepreneur in proportion to the value created, and a reward to the investor in proportion to the risk and the level of investment?
Also taking capital investing it, providing a ROI to both investors and entrepreneurs and making the world a better place would just be what &#039;good&#039; for profits do.
Perhaps that would be a good thing.
Let&#039;s stop seducing passionate caring entrepreneurs into the &#039;progress traps&#039; that so many social enterprises become!
Seduced by notions of a morally and ethically superior movement (whiffs of fascism), seduced by cheap money from the state.  Seduced by an instant injection of street credibility by the label.
I don&#039;t give a a damn about how an entrepreneur negotiates deals with those who supply capital.  All I care about is whether they radically pursue &#039;good work&#039; in the Schumacherian sense.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Whoa steady Tiger!<br />
Firstly why should just CICs from the pantheon of SE legal structures provide a reward to  the entrepreneur in proportion to the value created, and a reward to the investor in proportion to the risk and the level of investment?<br />
Also taking capital investing it, providing a ROI to both investors and entrepreneurs and making the world a better place would just be what &#8216;good&#8217; for profits do.<br />
Perhaps that would be a good thing.<br />
Let&#8217;s stop seducing passionate caring entrepreneurs into the &#8216;progress traps&#8217; that so many social enterprises become!<br />
Seduced by notions of a morally and ethically superior movement (whiffs of fascism), seduced by cheap money from the state.  Seduced by an instant injection of street credibility by the label.<br />
I don&#8217;t give a a damn about how an entrepreneur negotiates deals with those who supply capital.  All I care about is whether they radically pursue &#8216;good work&#8217; in the Schumacherian sense.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

